HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7384-B Staff AnalysisFebruary 23, 2004
ITEM NO_: 4
File No..
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned
Z -7384-B
Creative Heights Partners, LLC
4923 Stonewall Road
Part of Lots 3, 4 and 5, Block 28,
Newton's Addition
M
Variance Requested: A variance is requested from the fence/wall
provisions of Section 36-516 to allow a
privacy fence and masonry wall which
exceed the maximum height allowed.
Justification,
Present Use of Property
Proposed Use of Property
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
The applicant's justification is presented
in an attached letter.
Single Family Residence (being remodeled)
Single Family Residential
1. The existing picket fence extends 12.2 to 15.4 feet into the public right-
of-way and should be removed.
2. All portions of the columns and walls should be located outside the
public right-of-way of Jackson and Stonewall.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 4923 Stonewall Road contains a single family
structure which- is currently under reconstruction. The Board of
Adjustment recently approved setback variances associated with a garage
extension, front porch with steps, and trellis structure. The Board also
granted variances for a six (6) foot high wall (with 7 foot columns) running
from the northwest corner of the structure to the west property line, as well
as the masonry wall along the east side of the new driveway. The Board
February 23, 2004
ITEM NO.: 4 (Cont.
denied a variance associated with a masonry wall which was proposed to
extend approximately 15 feet into the Jackson Street right-of-way.
The applicant is now requesting a variance to allow an eight (8) foot high
masonry wall along the west -(Jackson Street) property line, with an eight
(8) foot high wood fence running from the southwest corner of the
property and tying into an existing six (6) foot high wood fence along the
south property line. Section 36-516(e)(1)a. of the City's Zoning Ordinance
allows a maximum fence/wall height of four (4) feet between a building
setback line and a street right-of-way, and six (6) feet elsewhere on the
property. The minimum required building setback (side yard) from the
west (Jackson Street) property line is eight (8) feet.
Staff does not support the fence height variance, as requested. Staff
supported a six (6) foot high fence/wall at the requested location when the
previous variances were addressed by the Board in June, 2003. Staff will
continue to support a variance to allow a six (6) foot high fence/wall
structure with seven (7) foot columns, to be located along the west and a
portion of the south property line, subject to compliance with the Public
Works comments as noted in paragraph A. of this report. Staff feels that
a six (6) foot high fence will not be out of character with other fences in
this general area. A six (6) foot high fence should have no adverse
impact on the adjacent properties.
C. Staff Recommendations:
Staff recommends denial of the fence height variance, as requested.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (FEBRUARY 23, 2004)
Kathy Pursell was present, representing the application. There were no
objectors present. Staff presented the application with a recommendation of
denial, as filed. Staff noted support of a six (6) foot high fence/wall with seven
(7) foot columns, as noted in paragraph B. of the staff report.
Kathy Pursell addressed the Board in support of the application. She described
the proposed eight (8) foot high wall and fence. She noted that a six (6) foot
high fence/wall would not provide the desired privacy for the courtyard area on
the west side of the residence. She noted that the fence/wall would be 16 feet
back from the street. She provided the Board with photos of the property and
other properties in the general area. She briefly discussed the photos with the
Board.
2
February 23, 2004
ITEM NO.: 4 Cont.
Chairman Gray noted that an eight (8) foot high fence and wall was too tall for
this particular property. He noted support for staff's recommendation of a six (6)
foot high fence and wall with seven (7) foot columns.
Vice -Chairman Francis concurred with Chairman Gray.
There was a motion (and second) to approve the application as filed.
There was a general discussion related to the proposed fence/wall and other
fences and walls in the general area.
Bill Ruck noted that he concurred with Chairman Gray and Vice -Chairman
Francis.
Staff noted that if the application is not approved, a four (4) foot high fence and
wall is the maximum height that will be permitted along the west property line.
Kathy Pursell revised the application to be a fence/wall with a height of six (6)
feet, with seven (7) foot tall columns.
The initial motion and second was retracted. There was another motion (and
second) to approve the application, as revised. The motion passed by a vote of
5 ayes and 0 nays. The revised application was approved.
3